ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Scanner-agnostic MRI harmonization via SSIM-guided disentanglement.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The variability introduced by differences in MRI scanner models, acquisition protocols, and imaging sites hinders consistent analysis and generalizability across multicenter studies. Methods: We present a novel image-based harmonization framework for 3D T1-weighted brain MRI, which disentangles anatomical content from scanner- and site-specific variations. The model incorporates a differentiable loss based on the Structural Similarity Index Measure (SSIM) to preserve biologically meaningful features while reducing inter-site variability. This formulation allows luminance, contrast, and structural components to be modeled separately during optimization. Training and validation were performed on multiple publicly available datasets spanning diverse scanners and sites, with testing on both healthy individuals and populations with pathological conditions. The proposed approach was evaluated across multiple target settings, including scanner-site-specific targets and a style-agnostic target, and compared with representative image-based harmonization benchmark methods. Results: Across these target settings, harmonization produced consistent and high-quality outputs. Visual comparisons, voxel intensity distributions, and SSIM-based metrics demonstrated that harmonized images achieved improved alignment across acquisition settings while preserving anatomical fidelity. In the style-agnostic setting, within-subject original-harmonized comparisons showed high anatomical preservation, with the structural component of SSIM reaching 0.975 ± 0.007. Appearance consistency also improved, with Wasserstein distances between mean voxel intensity distributions decreasing from 8.45 ± 5.35 before harmonization to 1.77 ± 0.62, and luminance similarity increasing from 0.952 ± 0.037 to 0.982 ± 0.017. Downstream analyses further confirmed the effectiveness of the proposed approach. For brain age prediction, mean absolute error decreased from 4.08 ± 1.16 to 2.81 ± 0.55 years following style-agnostic harmonization. For Alzheimer's disease classification, the area under the ROC curve improved from 0.857 ± 0.038 to 0.899 ± 0.024. Compared with the considered benchmark methods, the proposed framework showed stronger image-level harmonization and more consistent downstream improvements under the adopted evaluation protocol. Discussion: Overall, the proposed framework enhances cross-site image consistency, preserves anatomically relevant information, and improves downstream predictive performance, providing a robust and generalizable solution for large-scale multicenter neuroimaging studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.